4 ms·

Ah yes, the tired old free-marketeer. You're the reason we need regulations over self-destructive things. Society gets to make that call sometimes. Or, if you

by lvs 6y ago

Ah yes, the tired old free-marketeer. You're the reason we need regulations over self-destructive things. Society gets to make that call sometimes. Or, if you really think not, would you instead be interested in buying some of this oil that will cure not only your aging but also your wife problems? I extract it from a snake, and I think you'll see the benefits of it immediately. (p.s. The oil also makes you immune to covid and meetings!)

sparkie 6y ago
> Ah yes, the tired old free-marketeer. You're the reason we need regulations over self-destructive things. Society gets to make that call sometimes. Fortunately, Bitcoin fixes this. "Society" has no ability to seize bitcoin or censor its transactions. Soon enough, it won't be able to even detect them. The mob does not always make the right decisions, especially when they have nothing at stake. Public servants usually have nothing at stake and it is very easy to be wrong when spending other people's money as opposed to your own. > Or, if you really think not, would you instead be interested in buying some of this oil that will cure not only your aging but also your wife problems? I extract it from a snake, and I think you'll see the benefits of it immediately. (p.s. The oil also makes you immune to covid and meetings!) I'm all for people being able to sell these non-products, and for people to buy these non-products if they wish for them. While they might not have any meaningful real effect, they can often have a placebo effect which can be beneficial to the purchaser. People are, and should be free to make their own judgements with their money. You can't shelter everyone all the time. If some are no longer able to make sound judgements, they should have support from relatvies with their finances rather than the government. The current governments around the world are a great example of snake oil salesmen. They've managed to sell everyone an iatrogenic "lockdown" which is harmful their health, with claims that it is for their benefit, with no evidence. Who regulates the government? Who is going to hold these policymakers to account for the excess preventable deaths they've caused which are a result of the lockdowns, as opposed to the mostly unpreventable deaths which were a cause of nature (if we assume the virus is of natural origin)? There is a cure for Statism at least. It is called Bitcoin.
- Nursie 6y ago
  >> "Society" has no ability to seize bitcoin or censor its transactions. Chinese society likely could censor, given the prevalence of mining in that country and their government's love of interference. And various governments can and have seized bitcoin. This is a fairy tale.
  - sparkie 6y ago
    > Chinese society likely could censor, given the prevalence of mining in that country and their government's love of interference. What are they censoring? All transactions? They can only do self-harm in this manner because they must expend large amounts of electricity, perpetually, in order to keep up their censorship, and they don't know what they're censoring. This is assuming that they do indeed have the ability to 51% attack Bitcoin, and that the rest of the world is unable to use the nuclear option of changing their software clients to bypass the 51% attack. (Mining is not the ultimate arbiter of the correct chain - individuals are the ultimate arbiter via their choice of software client). A nuclear option would make all of their hardware immediately useless and eliminate any influence over Bitcoin they may have. > And various governments can and have seized bitcoin. This is a fairy tale. They can seize Bitcoin if you leave your private keys on an unencrypted machine, or if you leave your 12 word written phrase lying around at home. They can't seize your seed phrase or passphrase from your head, which can deterministically generate your bitcoin wallet on any machine. They can't seize it from an encrypted disk either, unless you reveal to them the keys to decrypt it. In the UK they may be able to force you to hand over keys for decryption or threaten you with 2 years of jail time. Not in the USA. The point was that, Bitcoin can be made unseizable because it is merely information. This is very unlike dollars, gold, or other physical commodities which can be seized by force, or threat of force, which has been done before - EO 6102. An attempt to try and emulate EO 6102 for Bitcoin would result in a very different outcome.
    - Nursie 6y ago
      A country with a majority of miners can censor transactions from addresses it chooses to blacklist. Just as miners can choose to include transactions with fees they like, so can they exclude transactions from addresses they are under pressure to exclude. Authorities in more countries than the UK have seized bitcoin. You make the classic mistake of looking at where the system is hardest and declaring it secure, instead of looking at where it is softest, the user and their systems. They can't seize fiat if they don't know where I buried it either. Bitcoin is no more secure than that. Like I said, these are fairy tales you tell yourself about security.

by lvs 6y ago

sparkie 6y ago

> Ah yes, the tired old free-marketeer. You're the reason we need regulations over self-destructive things. Society gets to make that call sometimes. Fortunately, Bitcoin fixes this. "Society" has no ability to seize bitcoin or censor its transactions. Soon enough, it won't be able to even detect them. The mob does not always make the right decisions, especially when they have nothing at stake. Public servants usually have nothing at stake and it is very easy to be wrong when spending other people's money as opposed to your own. > Or, if you really think not, would you instead be interested in buying some of this oil that will cure not only your aging but also your wife problems? I extract it from a snake, and I think you'll see the benefits of it immediately. (p.s. The oil also makes you immune to covid and meetings!) I'm all for people being able to sell these non-products, and for people to buy these non-products if they wish for them. While they might not have any meaningful real effect, they can often have a placebo effect which can be beneficial to the purchaser. People are, and should be free to make their own judgements with their money. You can't shelter everyone all the time. If some are no longer able to make sound judgements, they should have support from relatvies with their finances rather than the government. The current governments around the world are a great example of snake oil salesmen. They've managed to sell everyone an iatrogenic "lockdown" which is harmful their health, with claims that it is for their benefit, with no evidence. Who regulates the government? Who is going to hold these policymakers to account for the excess preventable deaths they've caused which are a result of the lockdowns, as opposed to the mostly unpreventable deaths which were a cause of nature (if we assume the virus is of natural origin)? There is a cure for Statism at least. It is called Bitcoin.

Nursie 6y ago
>> "Society" has no ability to seize bitcoin or censor its transactions. Chinese society likely could censor, given the prevalence of mining in that country and their government's love of interference. And various governments can and have seized bitcoin. This is a fairy tale.
- sparkie 6y ago
  > Chinese society likely could censor, given the prevalence of mining in that country and their government's love of interference. What are they censoring? All transactions? They can only do self-harm in this manner because they must expend large amounts of electricity, perpetually, in order to keep up their censorship, and they don't know what they're censoring. This is assuming that they do indeed have the ability to 51% attack Bitcoin, and that the rest of the world is unable to use the nuclear option of changing their software clients to bypass the 51% attack. (Mining is not the ultimate arbiter of the correct chain - individuals are the ultimate arbiter via their choice of software client). A nuclear option would make all of their hardware immediately useless and eliminate any influence over Bitcoin they may have. > And various governments can and have seized bitcoin. This is a fairy tale. They can seize Bitcoin if you leave your private keys on an unencrypted machine, or if you leave your 12 word written phrase lying around at home. They can't seize your seed phrase or passphrase from your head, which can deterministically generate your bitcoin wallet on any machine. They can't seize it from an encrypted disk either, unless you reveal to them the keys to decrypt it. In the UK they may be able to force you to hand over keys for decryption or threaten you with 2 years of jail time. Not in the USA. The point was that, Bitcoin can be made unseizable because it is merely information. This is very unlike dollars, gold, or other physical commodities which can be seized by force, or threat of force, which has been done before - EO 6102. An attempt to try and emulate EO 6102 for Bitcoin would result in a very different outcome.
  - Nursie 6y ago
    A country with a majority of miners can censor transactions from addresses it chooses to blacklist. Just as miners can choose to include transactions with fees they like, so can they exclude transactions from addresses they are under pressure to exclude. Authorities in more countries than the UK have seized bitcoin. You make the classic mistake of looking at where the system is hardest and declaring it secure, instead of looking at where it is softest, the user and their systems. They can't seize fiat if they don't know where I buried it either. Bitcoin is no more secure than that. Like I said, these are fairy tales you tell yourself about security.